The Biblical Doctrine 
of Holiness 



ROBINSON 



THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE 
OF HOLINESS 


BY 


GEORGE L. ROBINSON, Ph.D. 

Professor of Old Testament Literature and Exegesis in 
the McCormick Theological Seminary, 

Chicago, Illinois 




> -a o 4 , ? 

■-'»>< . 4 * » 1 

5 )>>}} J > > > > 1 

• ) > > ) > J > 4 

o , i » e -> i 


1903 

THE WINONA PUBLISHING COMPANY 

CHICAGO, ILL. WINONA LAKE, IND. 


The library or 
CONGRESS, 

One Copy Received 

JUL 2? 1903 

S '* right tffrmv 

<*- KXo, No. 

t, i s ,r / 

COPY 8. 



Copyright, 1903, By 
The Winona Publishing Company 
Published June, 1903. 



Printed at the University of Chicago Press 














THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS. 


REV. GEORGE L. ROBINSON, Ph.D., 

PROFESSOR OF OLD TESTAMENT LITERATURE AND EXEGE¬ 
SIS IN THE MCCORMICK THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, 
CHICAGO, ILL. 

A study of the doctrine of holiness, as taught 
in sacred Scripture, should not fail to profit because 
holiness is so conspicuously the moral and spiritual 
ideal of both Old Testament and New. Through 
the inspired lawgiver the ancient Hebrews were 
commanded: “Ye shall be holy, for I, Jehovah 
your God, am holy” (Lev. 19:2); and centuries 
later the New Testament apostle also exhorts the 
Hebrews to “follow after holiness ” (literally “the 
sanctification ”), without which no man shall see 
the Lord (Heb. 12:14); while Paul, commending 
the Thessalonians, encourages them likewise to love 
one another to the end that their hearts may be 
established “ unblamable in holiness ” (1 Thess. 
3:13; cf. 1 Pet. 1:16). Thus in both Old Testa- 
tament and New, holiness is man’s religious ideal. 

1. Its etymology and significance among the early 
Semites .— The genesis of the idea of “ holiness ” is 
wrapped in obscurity. It emerges from very 
antique associations and has had a long and com- 


3 




4 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


plicated history. The primitive concept probably 
possessed only a secular meaning; this was super¬ 
seded by a religious, and this, in turn, by an ethical. 
There is abundance of evidence that a common 
Semitic word, 12 Hp, has been taken up and purified 
by revelation. The root is used in nearly all of 
the Semitic dialects, including Hebrew, Phoenician, 
Arabic, Aramaic, Ethiopic, and Assyrian. 1 In 
Hebrew the noun HJlp, ‘‘holiness,” the adjective 
T 23 V 7 p, “holy,” and the denominative verb tfhp^ 
“to hallow,” occur with very great frequency. 2 

Its original meaning having been lost, we can 
only conjecture what it may have been. On the 
one hand, Dillmann has suggested that, etomologi- 
cally, it is related to the Arabic and Ethiopic fcOp 
or np, signifying “to be bright,” reminding one 
also of the Assyrian kuddusu, “brilliant,” and of the 
Hebrew linf!, “to be new.” If Dillmann’s conjec¬ 
ture be correct, then a positive idea lies at the base 
of its derived meaning, namely, that of “bril¬ 
liancy.” 3 But most authorities prefer the deriva¬ 
tion of Fleischer, Delitzsch, and von Baudissin, 

1 As a proper name, Kidsi, it is found in the Tell el- 
Amarna tablets. 

•The verb-stem is used in allot the different so-called 
species, except the Pual and Hophal. 

3 Likewise Kittel in Realencyclopaedia , art. “Heiligkeit 
Gottes im Alten Testament.” 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 5 


who connect it with the unused Hebrew stem.Tip, 
meaning “to cut off,” hence something “cut off,” 
“set apart,” or “separated.” This etymology, 
though negative in sense, is so much more consist¬ 
ent with the uses made of it in the Old Testament 
that it carries the weight of probability on its side. 
Its primary significance seems to have been that of 
“separation,” “restriction,” “distance,” “with¬ 
drawal,” “ unapproachableness.” 

For example, the Nazarite is described, in Num¬ 
bers 6: 8, as “holy unto Jehovah during all the 
days of his separation.” To Ahimelech, the priest 
at Nob, David and his soldiers are declared to be 
holy because of their abstemious (sexual) life dur¬ 
ing the three preceding days (1 Sam. 21:5). Even 
a woman who separated herself from others and 
practiced harlotry in the name of religion at the 
shrines of the Canaanites was called a or 

“sacred prostitute,” not, of course, in virtue of her 
character, but in virtue rather of her separation 
and consecration to the lustful practices of a cor¬ 
rupt religion {cf. Gen. 38:21, 22; Deut. 23:17, 18; 
Hos. 4:14)* In Lev. 10:10 Tinp stands in antith- 

4 Compare the “sacred slave girls” at Corinth, mentioned 
by Strabo (VIII, 378; XVL, i, 20); the hierodouloi in Baby¬ 
lon spoken of by Herodotus (I, 199); and the Mohammedan 
rites practiced today in the name of Islam at Tanta in the 
delta of Egypt. 


6 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


esis to bh, as does to niffB: “Thatye may 
make a distinction between the holy and the com¬ 
mon, and between the unclean and the clean.” 
That is, holiness is opposed to whatever is “com¬ 
mon” or “profane,” and “open” for use to any¬ 
body without restriction and without fear of 
supernatural penalties (cf. i Sam. 21:5; Ezek. 
22:26; 42: 20). 

At the same time, holiness, in primitive times, 
was also conceived of as something contagious, as 
a quality which could be transmitted by contact. 
“Whatsoever toucheth the altar shall be holy” 
(Exod. 29:37, c/. 30: 29; Lev. 6:27; Isa. 65:5; 
Ezek. 44 :19, 46 : 20). This conception lived on in 
post-biblical Judaism, and seems to have formed 
the basis of the early Jewish idea of “ canonicity.” 
For example, to the common people, who believed 
that holiness was contagious, and, therefore, if they 
could but touch the edge of a sacred roll of Scrip¬ 
ture they would receive divine benefit (as did the 
woman of Capernaum, who pressed through the 
crowd to touch the hem of Christ’s garment — 
Matt. 9:21), the Jewish rabbis, in their character¬ 
istic way and by an anachronism of thought, in 
order to preserve the sacred rolls of the Old 
Testament from contamination, taught that, instead 
of conveying holiness, the sacred parchments “ de¬ 
filed the hands; ” and this was the beginning of 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 7 


what we are wont to call “ canonicity,” a word 
which, as is generally known, Athanasius employed 
in this sense for the first time in his Festal Epistles, 
365 A. D. Another idea similar to this, but even 
more curious, as an example of the extraordinary 
conceptions of holiness which were entertained by 
the early Semites, is the command in Deuteronomy 
not to “sow a vineyard with two kinds of seed, 
lest the whole fruit become holy, the seed which 
thou hast sown and the increase of the vineyard ” 
(22:9; cf. Lev. 19:19). Here the idea is that of 
forfeiture though defilement. 

In very ancient times, also, holiness was closely 
associated with and akin to “taboo,” the underly¬ 
ing notion of which is that certain things are no 
longer safe for ordinary use. For example, clothes 
worn by the Bedouin when making the sacred 
circuit of the kaaba at Mecca, in heathen times, be¬ 
came “ taboo ” because of that sacred function, and 
could neither be worn nor sold, but left at the gate 
of the sanctuary {cf. 1 Sam. 19:24; 2 Sam. 6:1452 
Kings 10: 2 2). s It has further been discovered 
that among savages and primitive peoples every¬ 
where a wide difference is always placed between 
what is divine and what is human. Everything 
divine is holy. The imagined presence of Deity 
in a place renders it holy. Hence, particular 
s Cf Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites , pp. 446 ff. 


8 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


places and things were said to be consecrated to 
Deity. In Lev. 27:28 we read that “ every de¬ 
voted thing was most holy unto Jehovah.” The 
Hebrew expression for “ devoted thing ” here 
is D'lFl ( herem ), a word closely akin to ttHp, 
and one which we have taken over, through 
the Arabic, into our own language, and which 
signifies that portion of an oriental’s house 
set apart and devoted exclusively to the women. 
Everything “consecrated” was holy; especially 
everything consecrated to Deity. That is to say to 
the early Semite holiness was a concept, not of ma¬ 
terial, but of relation. Persons, places, seasons, 
and things were holy, not because of their qualities 
per se, but because of their relation to Deity. “To 
hallow ” signified primarily to dedicate to religious 
uses, that is, to make a thing God’s property. 
Elisha is called a “holy man of God,” not so 
much on account of his saintliness of character as 
on account of his near relation to God (2 Kings 
4:9). Not only so, but when once a place or a 
thing was consecrated to Deity, it must remain 
consecrated. Thus even the censers of Korah and 
his company, which were holy because they had 
offered them before Jehovah, but which had be¬ 
come desecrated and were no longer fit for use as 
censers because strange incense had been offered 
in them, were nevertheless not to be thrown away, 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 9 


but beaten into plates for a covering of the holy 
altar (Numb. 16:36-40); for once holy, always 
holy, because of their relation to Jehovah. 

To the early Semite, however, holiness was de¬ 
void of all moral significance. The fact that the 
“sacred prostitutes” of the Canaanites are spoken 
of as fVilinp, or “holy women,” and that “Sod¬ 
omites” are called D^d^p, or “holy men,” in 
Deut. 23:17, 18, furnishes decisive evidence of the 
complete divorce among the early Semites of holi¬ 
ness and morality. Even when applied to Diety, 
the term has no ethical significance. For example, 
when Eshmunazar, king of Sidon, speaks in his 
funereal inscription (lines 9, 22) of the “holy 
gods,” DOTp dibK, he does not employ the term 
“holy” in an ethical sense. It is rather a mere 
“otiose epithet,” or redundancy of speech, synony¬ 
mous with divinity in general, and meaning prob¬ 
ably no more than the simple expression “the 
gods ” (cf. Dan. 4:8, 9,18 ; 5:11). 6 Diety was uni¬ 
versally conceived of in antique times as an object 
of terror. Listen to the men of Beth-shemesh, 
whose comrades Jehovah had smitten with great 
slaughter because they had looked into the ark of 
the covenant, as they exclaim: “Who is able to 
stand before Jehovah this holy God ” (1 Sam. 

6 Cf. A. B. Davidson, “Ezekiel,” Cambridge Bible , 
p. xxxix. 


IO BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


6:20)? Even to the modern Semite holiness is 
not everywhere a necessary attribute of Diety. The 
Mohammedan takes God’s name in vain, swears 
falsely by him, and thinks of him in the most 
shameful connections. 7 The consequence is that 
modern orientals have very deficient ideas of sin. 
They think of it only as misfortune. When a man 
prospers he is considered righteous ; when he suf¬ 
fers, or is afflicted, like Job, he is a sinner; that is, 
he is unfortunate. And so it was in primitive 
times. It was not until men came to think of God 
as holy that they had any appreciable conception 
of the heinousness of sin. The ancient Egyptians 
were never known to confess sin. On the contrary, 
the language of the dead before the judge in the 
spirit world is universally that of self-justification: 
“I am pure. I am pure. I am pure.” A fuller ap¬ 
preciation of God’s holiness was necessary to 
sharpen men’s minds and make them conscious of 
sin. How this was brought about we shall see as 
we proceed. 

2. In the Torah .— In discussing the develop¬ 
ment of this idea out of the non-ethical into the 
moral and spiritual, I shall begin with the doctrine 
as found in the Torah, or first division of the 

7 Cf. Curtis, Primitive Semitic Religion Today , p. 66 ; 
Doughty, Arabia Deserta , Vol. I, p. 266 ; Lane, Manners 
and Customs of the Modern Egyptians , pp. 286, 287. 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS u 


Canon, and, subsequently, as taught in the Proph¬ 
ets. I am quite aware that this is the reverse of 
the order usually pursued, but the reason is not far 
to seek. “In the Torah,” as one has well said, 
“the idea of divine holiness is built upon the 
broad foundations of God’s exalted and transcend¬ 
ent unapproachableness—the true prototype, not 
alone of the ethical, but also of the external and 
ritualistic; whereas, in the Prophets, God is treated 
as the outward manifestation of the spiritual being 
known as Jehovah.” To reverse the order would 
necessitate the supposition that the doctrine devel¬ 
oped suddenly from a notion which was non-ethical 
into the ethical and highly spiritual conception of 
the prophets; and that, subsequently, it degener¬ 
ated into the ethico-ritualistic system of the pro¬ 
phetic and priestly historians. Such a thing is not 
only a priori unnatural and improbable, but the 
facts themselves witness against it. The post- 
exilic psalms are of quite a different tenor from the 
Law, and yet ex hypothesi both sprang from the 
same general period; while Zech. 14 would in 
that case spiritualize the doctrine in the face of a 
stern legalism. Furthermore, it would be still 
more difficult to account for the many primitive 
Semitic conceptions (some of which we have 
already discussed) which still cling like cast-off 
vestments to the Law, whereas, in the Prophets, 


12 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


these were well-nigh totally discarded. The truer 
order of development, accordingly, seems rather 
to have been, first, as we have- seen, a holiness 
which is wholly non-ethical, as among the early 
Semites; next, a holiness which was both ritual 
and moral, as taught in the Torah; third, a holi¬ 
ness in the main moral and spiritual, as found in 
the Prophets, while eventually, as a principle, it 
finally becomes incarnated in the person of Jesus 
Christ. Let us now attempt to trace this order of 
development a little more closely. 

In the history of Israel the idea of holiness 
comes suddenly into prominence at the time of 
the exodus. With the exception of one passage 
(cf. Gen. 2:3), which received its present literary 
form at the earliest in the time of Moses, the con¬ 
cept is not to be found in the book of Genesis. In 
the remaining four books of the Pentateuch, on the 
contrary, the root occurs not less than 275 times, 
causing holiness to stand out as one of the cardi¬ 
nal doctrines of the Mosaic covenant. It is var¬ 
iously employed, being applied not only as an 
attribute to Israel’s God, but as a quality also of 
persons, seasons, and things standing in relation 
to Israel’s God. 

One of the most instructive passages to be 
noted is that contained in Exod. 3:5, in which 
Jehovah commands Moses out of the glowing bush: 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 13 


“ Draw not nigh hither, put off thy shoes from off 
thy feet, for the place whereon thou standest is 
holy ground.” The purpose of this theophany is 
obvious: Jehovah intended thereby to teach 
Moses that the ground round about that bush 
stood in special relation to him, that it was his, 
and that no one could tread upon it without his 
permission (cf. Deut. 33:2; Judg. 5:4,5; Hab. 
3:3). This was Israel’s first lesson in holiness. 

Later in Egypt, they are given another object- 
lesson. Moses is instructed to call a “ holy con¬ 
vocation” (Exod. 12:16) and observe the Feast 
of Unleavened Bread, after which he should sanc¬ 
tify to Jehovah, as his own peculiar people, all the 
firstborn whom He had saved from the power of 
the destroying angel. This Moses does and leads 
them on to freedom. Israel is victoriously delivered 
at the Red Sea; whereupon Moses sings of Jeho¬ 
vah’s matchless majesty and ethical might : “ Who 
is like unto thee, O Jehovah, among the Gods? 
Who is like unto thee, glorious in holiness, fearful 
in praises, doing wonders” (Exod. 15:11; cf. 1 
Sam. 2:2)? Israel had been wonderfully re¬ 
deemed. Subsequently, at Sinai, Jehovah pro¬ 
claims his purpose of sanctifying not only the 
firstborn, but the whole nation, unto himself as “ a 
kingdom of priests and a holy people” (Exod. 
19:6). This passage reveals the close relation 


i 4 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


which Israel sustained to Jehovah ; it also implies 
that in return for deliverance from slavery they 
owed him certain duties. 

During the months which followed, the foun¬ 
dations, at least, of a ritual were laid, the sanctity 
of which is most graphically set forth in a group 
of passages contained in the latter half of the book 
of Exodus. Certain places, persons, seasons, and 
things are formally set apart and consecrated as 
holy. First of all, a sacred sanctuary is constructed 
as the residence of Jehovah, the most holy God of 
Israel. This is divided into two compartments, 
one a holy place, the other a holy of holies (Exod. 
26 : 33). Aaron and his sons are consecrated to 
to the holy office of the priesthood, and holy gar¬ 
ments are prepared for them (Exod. 28:2,4; 
29 : 29); a holy plate inscribed “ holy to Jehovah ” 
(28:36) is placed as a crown upon the high- 
priest’s miter (29:6); the seventh day, to be 
known as a sabbath of sabbaths, is dedicated holy 
unto Jehovah (35 : 2); holy gifts are commanded 
(28:38); holy incense (30:35-37) and holy 
anointing oil (30:25) are specified as necessary 
accompaniments of worship ; while all their sacri¬ 
fices must be offered upon the holy altar (29 : 37). 
Only by steadfastly performing every detail of 
Jehovah’s prescribed ritual could rebellious Israel 
expect acceptance in the sight of an angry God. 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 15 


And yet the need of ritual was due, not to Jeho¬ 
vah’s wrath, but rather to his holiness ; for it was 
violated holiness which required expiation. 

By far the most instructive passages, however, 
in the Torah concerning holiness are those which 
occur so frequently in the book of Leviticus, 
especially in chaps. 17-26, which are technically 
known as the “ Laws of Holiness.” Here are some 
of the most characteristic of them : “ Sanctify 
yourselves therefore, and be ye holy; for I am 
Jehovah your God ” (20: 7). “And ye shall be 
holy unto me ; for I Jehovah am holy and have set 
you apart from the peoples that ye should be mine” 
(20:26). “ And ye shall not profane my holy 

name : but I will be hallowed among the children 
of Israel: I am Jehovah who halloweth you” 
(22: 32)—priests and people alike (2i:6f 519:2 ; cf. 
Exod. 22:31). In fact, the Levitical commands 
are comprehensively summed up in the one signifi¬ 
cant and oft-repeated dictum : “ Ye shall be holy; 

for I Jehovah your God am holy ” (19: 2). This 
brief sentence contains one of the most marvelous 
teachings in the entire Old Testament. It finds 
its counterpart in nothing short of the words of 
our Lord when he said : “Ye, therefore, shall be 
perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect ” (Matt. 
5:48). For while the ethical content of the latter 
may exceed that of the former, both alike set 


16 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


before mankind the same majestic goal — God. 
Even the Levitical command required something 
more than ritual. It taught both a relation and a 
duty. It implied that if Israel became holy their 
holiness would be in some sense a reflection of the 
holiness of Jehovah. It meant more than simply 
“you must be mine because I am yours.” On the 
contrary, it set holiness before the world as the goal 
of the true spiritual religion. It bade men to imi¬ 
tate what is most characteristic and fundamental 
in the true God — namely, his supreme and abso¬ 
lute moral excellence. It is this which furnished 
the ground for the divine commands against 
idolatry and sorcery and all other species of sin; 
it was the basis of all moral obligation — “the 
maxim,” as Principal Fairbairn in his masterly 
work 8 has expressed it, “ on which Israel’s worship 
was founded.” In short, this passage is the most 
remarkable, the most comprehensive, varied, and 
important epitome of the whole Law to be found 
anywhere. 

Here is a summary of what is probably included 
in it when thoroughly exegeted, but by no means 
completely exhausted: 

Be ye separate as I am; be ye free from all 
moral evil; be ye clean and pure; be ye sinless; 
be ye self-consistent; be ye worthy of honor as I 

8 The Philosophy of the Christian Religion, p. 251. 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 17 


am ; have completeness of life as I have; have 
energy of will; ever will to be pure, as I do; be 
active, ever manifesting an outgoing energy; be 
hallowed in person as I am; be Godlike, like 
God ; be consecrated, in order that God may dwell 
in his chosen sanctuary and radiate his glory 
among his people from center to circumference. 
Thus living a holy and separate life, you will daily 
manifest the covenant relation in which you stand 
as a holy people to a holy God. 

This, I take it, is what the inspired lawgiver 
meant when he commanded Israel: “Ye shall be 
holy; for I Jehovah am holy.” Holiness here 
wins an ethical sense, as in Numb. 15:40, where it 
is explicitly enjoined to “remember and do all my 
commandments and be holy unto your God.” 

Thus from the Torah we obtain a double con¬ 
ception of holiness: in part ritual, in part ethical; 
in part outward, in part inward ; on one side physi¬ 
cal, on the other side spiritual; Jehovah transcend¬ 
ent over Israel, and at the same time tabernacling 
among Israel in the sanctuary. 

Bennett 9 has compared “the sacred system of 
the Pentateuch to a pyramid whose base is a 
pentagon, the five sides of which are the sacred 
people, the sacred land, the sacred seasons, the 
sacred acts, and the sacred objects. From these 

9 Theology of the Old Testament , p. 160. 


18 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


base lines there is in each case a gradation to 
successively smaller classes, with a corresponding 
increased sancity, till the pyramid reaches its apex 
in the central rite of the Day of Atonement, when 
the most sacred person, the high-priest, went into 
the most sacred place, on the most sacred day, and 
performed the most sacred acts of the ritual, name¬ 
ly, the offering of incense before the ark and the 
sprinkling of blood upon the mercy seat.” 

The Torah retains many of the antique concep¬ 
tions current among the early Semites; neverthe¬ 
less, in the main, it involved the performance of 
strictly moral duties. Ritual was deemed necessary 
in order to educate men up to the point where they 
could grasp the idea of a spiritual God ; but it was 
also fraught, as history afterward proved, with 
great danger; for as long as ritual requirements 
were regarded by Israel as of paramount impor¬ 
tance, a purely moral conception of religion was 
impossible. And, strangely enough, the Law 
recognizes no distinction between the moral and 
the ceremonial. Holiness as set forth in the Torah 
is only symbolic in outline. “ For a complete con¬ 
ception of it we must wait till in the face of Jesus 
Christ we see the full glory of God.” 10 

3. In the Prophets .— In the Prophets we find a 

10 Beet, Holiness as Understood by the Writers of the Bible 
(1886), pp. 21 ff. 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 19 


much broader, fuller, and more ethical conception 
of holiness than that taught in the Law; for, 
though even the prophets did not entirely divest 
themselves of their primitive Semitic inheritances, 
yet the Godhead of Jehovah meant much more to 
them than to their predecessors. From the eighth 
century onward, Jehovah was holy in the sense of 
moral goodness : holy because he frowned upon 
all that was morally base. Ethical righteousness 
was the supreme teaching of the age. Not that 
the prophets taught anything new about Jehovah, 
but rather that, “ with history as their lesson-book, 
they taught many things more clearly.” 11 Chief 
among these was duty. 

To Amos a religious rite which was consistent 
with the Godhead of other deities was grossly 
inconsistent with the holiness of Jehovah because 
he was moral. Israel’s wayward conduct was a 
desecration of Jehovah’s holy name. “ A man and 
his father go in unto the same maiden to profane 
my holy name ” (2 : 7). The very name of Jehovah 
was holy. Israel must also be holy because they 
belonged to Jehovah as his own peculiar property, 
for his name had been called over them in token 
of ownership (9 :12). In a certain passage Amos 
represents Jehovah as swearing by his holiness 

11 Cf. A. B. Davidson, art. “ God, ” in Hastings’ Dic¬ 
tionary of the Bible , Vol. II, p. 204. 


20 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


(4 : 2); in another as swearing by himself (literally, 
“by his soul,” i. e. f by his essence, 6:8) to confirm 
an oath. Hence, to the prophet Amos holiness is 
synonymous with divinity, and divinity with truth¬ 
fulness ; for Jehovah takes an oath to strengthen 
his affirmation to destroy Israel, his holiness being 
made the pledge of its validity (cf. Ps. 89 :35). 

To Hosea, on the other hand, Jehovah was a 
God whose justice might rightfully move him to 
destroy disobedient Israel as Admah and Zeboiim, 
yet, because he is the “ Holy One,” he is free from 
all human revenge, and, being God and not man, 
he will not waver in his purpose to show mercy 
unto Israel (n :g). For, though he dwells in the 
midst of a people who sacrifice with prostitutes 
(4:14), and like Judah are unstable with the faith¬ 
ful and “Holy One” (11:12), still he himself 
abides firm, above the passions and weaknesses of 
men, in his determination to show loving-kindness 
to Israel. Therefore, moral. 

To Micah, Jehovah was a God dwelling soli¬ 
tarily (7:14) on high (6 :6) in the temple of his 
holiness (1 : 2). 

To Habakkuk he was of purer eyes than to 
behold iniquity, the “Holy One” who proves his 
holiness by his righteousness and cannot allow 
wickedness to go unpunished either in Israel or on 
the side of the Chaldeans. “Art thou not from 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 21 


everlasting, O Jehovah, my God, my Holy One?” 
We shall not die, but the Chaldeans they shall die. 
For “Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, 
and canst not hold thy peace when the wicked 
swalloweth up the man that is more righteous than 
he” (1:12, 13; 3:3). 

To Ezekiel holiness was more objective; par¬ 
ticularly in chaps. 40-48 he teaches a physical con¬ 
ception of holiness conditioned by ritual, and very 
similar to that found in the “Laws of Holiness” 
(Lev., chaps. 17-26). In this section of his prophe¬ 
cies he rebukes the priests for having done violence 
to the Law in that they have profaned holy things, 
having made no distinction between the holy and 
the common (42 : 20; 44:23; cf. 22: 26). He even 
speaks of holiness as though it were contagious 
(44 :19; 46 : 20; cf., on the contrary, Hag. 2:12 ff.). 
Indeed, he outlines a ritual for the post-exilic com¬ 
munity ; Jehovah is to have a most holy sanctuary 
(41 :4), with holy chambers (42 113; 44:19); the 
priests shall wear holy garments (42 114); the peo¬ 
ple shall eat holy portions (42 :13) and offer holy 
oblations (45:1; 48:18). In short, the former 
temple service shall be restored. 

These last nine chapters of Ezekiel, taken by 
themselves, might indicate that the prophet was 
paving the way for a system such as is known to us 
in the book of Leviticus, but the historical back- 


22 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


ground to these chapters must not be overlooked. 
That lies in chaps. 33-37. From these it is evi¬ 
dent that it is a people forgiven and sanctified whom 
the prophet contemplates, and for whom the ritual 
of chaps. 40-48 is intended. The prophet, there¬ 
fore, does not find it necessary in these latter chap¬ 
ters to vindicate morality anew, because he feels 
that morality is assured. 12 It is true that Ezekiel 
lays great emphasis on the exalted and transcendent 
character of God ; at the same time he describes 
him as moral, and once at least speaks of him as 
“ the Holy One in Israel ” (39: 7). He even 
defines how Jehovah sanctifies himself and may be 
sanctified by others. He sanctifies himself when 
he reveals himself as he is. On the other hand, 
men may profane him when they constrain him to 
act in such a way as to disguise any of his great 
attributes, such as his power in the eyes of the 
nation so that they misinterpret him. 13 

To Zechariah ritual requirements are of little or 
no value. The ceremonial law will be forever abol¬ 
ished, and the distinction between the ceremonially 
clean and unclean will forever be done away. 
The most secular things and things having not the 
remotest connection with worship will be as holy as 

12 Cf. A. B. Davidson, “Ezekiel,” Cambridge Bible, pp. 
xxxvii-xlii. 

^ Ibid., p. xl. 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 23 


religious objects formerly were when dedicated to 
the worship of Jehovah by special consecration. 
Even upon the bells of the horses in that day shall 
there be engraven the motto “Holy unto Jehovah.” 
Pots and vessels, heretofore only ceremonially 
clean, will be accounted holy, and the most com¬ 
mon vessels in Jehovah’s house shall be like the 
most sacred bowls before the altar; yea, every pot 
in Jerusalem and in Judah shall be holy unto Jeho¬ 
vah of hosts (14:20, 21). For in the perfected 
kingdom of God everything without exception will 
be holy and all things will be equally holy. 

To this Malachi adds nothing, except that he 
rebukes the people of Judah for profaning the holi¬ 
ness of Jehovah which he loveth (2 :11). 

It is in the book of Isaiah that the ethical im¬ 
port of divine holiness receives fullest expression. 
Hear the exhortations of the seer as he sounds 
these notes of warning and encouragement: “Jeho¬ 
vah of hosts, him shall ye sanctify, and let him be 
your fear and let him be your dread ” (8 : 13). He 
alone “is exalted in justice and God the Holy One 
is sanctified in righteousness ” (5 :16). And as for 
Judah, “ he that is left in Zion and he that remain- 
eth in Jerusalem shall be called holy ” (4 : 3), not 
in the sense merely of relationship, but of moral 
likeness to God. 

The locus classicusy however, of the prophet’s 


24 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


writings is found in the majestic account of his 
inaugural vision. In that account he describes 
how he heard a choir of seraphs singing the antiph- 
onal trisagion : “Holy, holy, holy, is Jehovah of 
Hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory” (6:3). 
Isaiah was startled; not, however, because he saw 
the all-powerful One, not because he had seen a 
vision of the dreadful One, but because he per¬ 
ceived for the first time the Holy One, and had 
awakened in him as never before his own sinfulness. 
In the presence of Jehovah’s holiness he felt his 
own unholiness; in the presence of God’s sublime 
moral excellence he recognized his own moral 
deficiency. He, a sinful man, had been confronted 
with a new and overpowering sense of supreme 
Godhead. Concentrated in Jehovah, he now recog¬ 
nized all the predicates of true divinity, and in 
attempting to describe his vision he represents him 
as thrice Ujilp, the full significance of which is 
very inadequately expressed by the English word 
“holy.” What that word included, to the prophet’s 
mind, can never be exactly known, but it probably 
embraced all those positive attributes of Jehovah 
which constitute true divinity and call for the 
religious emotions of awe, reverence, and adoration. 

Foremost of all it meant that Jehovah is the 
true God, the exalted and majestic One, the really 
divine One, the Royal Sovereign, whose glory fills 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 25 


the universe, and the only One whose name is 
worthy. Duhm, commenting on this passage, par¬ 
allels holiness with TD3, “glory,” making them 
practically synonymous. This cannot be done, 
however, as holiness points rather to the inner 
reality of Divinity, whereas glory to its outer 
appearance. As CEtinger has aptly expressed it: 
“ Holiness is hidden glory and glory is disclosed 
holiness.” Glory is a mere metaphysical and cos- 
mical description of God, a predicate which carries 
with it no particular ethical significance ; whereas 
holiness, to Isaiah at least, is an attribute which 
rendered Jehovah the morally unapproachable One, 
in whose presence the creature must necessarily be 
conscious of sin. 

How indelibly this vision of Jehovah as the 
Holy God left its impression upon Isaiah’s mind is 
attested, not only by the character of his preaching, 
but by the fact that he frequently spoke of Jehovah 
thereafter as “the Holy One of Israel.” This title 
occurs some thirteen times in chaps. 1-39 (beside 
the expression “The Holy One” in 5:16 and 
10:17), and twelve times in chaps. 40-66 (beside 
“the Holy One” in 43: 15 and “the Lofty One” 
in 57:15), and elsewhere only six times in the 
entire Old Testament (Ps. 71: 22; 78:41; 89:19; 
Jer. 1:29; 51:5; Hab. 1:12). Obviously, therefore, 
it is the echo of the seraphic sanctus. 


26 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


What the full import of the divine appellative 
to the prophet was is difficult to say. A recent 
writer speaks of it as a “ paradox,” meaning that 
the transcendent God has become God of Israel; 
another discovers in it “the interpenetration of 
God’s self-maintenance and self-disclosure.” It 
probably included both of these ideas, and more. 
Exegetically, it means that the God of Israel is the 
only true God, that he is the majestic and powerful 
One, incomparable, thoroughly righteous and 
moral, self-consistent in all his dealings with men, 
ever manifesting in the universe about us his glory; 
the God who chose Israel and was served by Israel, 
who is absolutely transcendent above everything 
finite, and at the same time so worthy of his essence 
as a spiritual God that he is the only appropriate 
object of reverence and worship, and, therefore, 
holy. With such a view of God, is it marvelous 
that Isaiah and his disciples became preachers of 
righteousness and vehemently condemned the sins 
of their contemporaries ? And is it any wonder 
that more and more, as moral action was felt to 
derive its value from internal volition, religious 
holiness, which hitherto consisted mainly in ritual 
requirements inherited from Mosaism, lost some¬ 
thing of its strictly objective character? 

4. In the Kethubim .— The development of this 
doctrine in the third division of the Canon, known 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 27 


as the Kethubim, need not detain us at any great 
length. As might naturally be expected, through 
the devotional spirit of the psalmists the external 
element more and more disappears; and yet the 
term never becomes purely moral in the Old 
Testament. 

Not infrequently the attribute is applied to God: 
“Jehovah our God is holy” (Ps. 99 : 3, 9); “ Holy 
and reverent is his name ” (Ps. 111 19). The patri¬ 
arch Job in his affliction consoles himself with the 
thought that he has “ not denied the words of the 
Holy One” (Job 6 : 10). In Ps. 89:35 Jehovah 
swears by “his holiness” (cf. Ps. 60:6; 108:7; 
Amos 4:2); while in Ps. 98: 1 the psalmist sings 
of Jehovah's “holy arm,” implying some vague 
sense of divinity perhaps (cf. Isa. 52:10), and in Ps. 
68 : 35, of God as “ terrible out of his holy places.” 

The same quality is occasionally ascribed to the 
angels who stand in special relation to God and to 
his work (cf. Ps. 89 : 5, 7; Job 5 : 1; 15:15). Only 
rarely are good men called holy in the poetical 
books. Once, however, Aaron is denominated 
“the holy one of Jehovah” (Ps. 106: 16). In Ps. 
34 : 9 the exhortation is made, “ Fear Jehovah, ye 
his holy ones,” and in Ps. 16:3 the divine satisfac¬ 
tion is thus expressed: “As for the holy ones that 
are in the earth, they are the excellent in whom is 
all my delight.” 


28 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


The deeper ethical character of holiness is much 
more clearly seen, however, when we consider the 
psalmist’s conditions of entrance into Jehovah’s 
holy presence: “ Who shall dwell in thy holy hill ?” 
inquires the author of Ps. 15, and the answer is 
returned: 

He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, 
And speaketh truth in his heart; 

He that slandereth not with his tongue. 

Nor doeth evil to his friend, 

Nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbor; 

In whose eyes a reprobate is despised, 

But who honoreth them that fear Jehovah ; 

He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not; 

He that putteth not out his money to usury, 

Nor taketh reward against the innocent. 

He that doeth these things shall never be moved — 

he shall live forever in the hill of thy holiness. A 
similar inquiry is made in Ps. 24: 3, “ Who shall 
stand in his holy place ?” and again purely ethical 
conditions are imposed: 

He that hath clean hands and a pure heart; 

Who hath not lifted up his soul unto falsehood, 

And hath not sworn deceitfully (vs. 4). 

Still further light is thrown upon the spiritual 
character of holiness by the fifty-first psalm, in 
which the presence of God’s spirit seems to be both 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 29 


a prerequisite and a corollary of a clean heart: 
“ Create in me a clean heart, O God, .... and 
take not thy spirit of holiness from me ” (vss. 10, 
n). 

In the remaining books of the Kethubim very 
little that is new is added to the ideas of holiness 
already obtained. In Chronicles we read of the 
“holy ark” (2 Chron. 35 : 3) and of “the beauty 
of holiness ” (1 Chron. 16 : 29; 2 Chron. 20: 21); in 
Ezra, of “the holy seed ”(9:2; cf. Isa. 6:13); in 
Nehemiah, of “the holy sabbath” (9:14); and in 
Daniel, of a “holy covenant” (11:28). By the 
same writer, also, the future people of God are 
described as “ the saints of the Most High ” (7:18- 
27). On the other hand, the language of Nebu¬ 
chadnezzar in Dan. 4:8 is the language of a poly¬ 
theist without any special ethical connotation, 
expressing only the general notion of divinity. 14 
Finally, in the book of Proverbs, as in Hos. 11:12, 
the plural of majesty, is employed as the 

name of God. It is usually translated “the Holy,” 
and is used almost as a proper name. The idea of 
divine holiness, however, has no very definite 
boundaries in the Old Testament. 

5. In the New Testament. — Passing to the New 
Testament, the old Hebrew conception is taken up 
and developed. But the ancient heathen word, 

*4 Cf. Driver, “Daniel,” Cambridge Bible , p. 48. 


3 o BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


lepo<s in Greek, which expressed relationship only, 
without consideration of inherent quality, was 
passed, by both the writers of the New Testament 
and the translators of the Old, and a comparatively 
new word, ayios, was chosen to convey more exactly 
the notion of the Hebrew TlWlp. Etymologically, 
ayios means separation from sin and association 
with or consecration to the gods. In New Testa¬ 
ment usage it became a qualitative and ethical 
term referring chiefly to character and implying 
essentially Godlikeness or completeness of life. 

One naturally expects to find a long step taken 
by the New Testament writers in the development 
of the doctrine, but, as a matter of fact, they only 
bring out a little more explicitly its ethical aspects 
and deepen by a few degrees its moral significance. 
As an idea, it is more characteristic of Old than of 
New Testament thought. Only the “woof” of the 
doctrine is new; the “warp” is old. For example, 
Jerusalem is still “the holy city” (Matt. 4:5; 
27 :53); the temple is still “the holy place” (Matt. 
24:15; Acts 6:13; 21:28); the firstborn is still 
considered holy unto the Lord (Luke 2:23); 
John the Baptist is feared by Herod Antipas because 
he is “a righteous and holy man” (Mark 6:20). 
The expression “the Holy Spirit” takes the place 
of the Old Testament phrase “ Spirit of Holiness ” 
(Luke 10:21). He it is who reveals the good- 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 31 

ness of God and makes men holy; hence, to resist 
the Holy Spirit is the unpardonable sin, because it 
is hatred of goodness (Matt. 12 131, 32 ; Mark 
3:29; 1 John 5:16,17; Heb. 10:26). Even 
the divine mercy finds its limitation here, because 
hatred of goodness forbids all possibility of for¬ 
giveness. 

The seventeenth chapter of John is also instruct¬ 
ive on this theme. Jesus there addresses his 
Father as “holy” (vs. n), and in a subsequent 
verse as “righteous” (vs. 25), both of which seem 
to be intended to express God’s moral self-consist¬ 
ency in not passing the same judgment upon his 
Son’s disciples which he pronounces upon “ the 
world.” Again in Rev. 4 : 8 the apostle declares, 
“ Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God, the Almighty,” 
who alone is worthy of all praise and honor because 
of his supreme and absolute moral perfection, “For 
thou alone art worthy” (15:4). 

The apostles and prophets are designated as 
holy {cf. Acts 3:21; 2 Pet. 1:21; Eph. 3:5); 
likewise Christians in general (1 Cor. 1 : 2). In 
1 Pet. 1:15 f., the old Levitical exhortation re¬ 
appears: “As he who called you is holy, be ye 
yourselves also holy in all manner of living: because 
it is written: Ye shall be holy as I am holy.” But 
Peter reiterates it with the additional force of an 
imperative which refers to manifestation as well as 


32 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


to essence ; that is, “show yourselves to be holy as 
indeed you really are, and so manifest to the 
world your spiritual standing with God.” 15 There 
is nothing ascetic in Peter’s language. Neither 
the Old Testament nor the New knows anything of 
asceticism, monasticism, or celibacy as a condition 
precedent to holiness. Even the guilds known as 
the “Sons of the Prophets” in Samuel’s day were 
cenobites, not celibates (cf. 2 Kings 4 : 1). To the 
modern oriental type of holiness, the holiness of 
cloistered seclusion and silence, such as that of the 
Carthusian and the Trappist, the New Testament 
in particular gives no encouragement. Alas, that 
such a conception of holiness should continue to 
haunt man’s imagination! 16 

It is in the person and life of Jesus Christ that 
we behold the true ideal. Before his advent he 
was announced as “the holy thing” (Luke 1:35); 
when he preached, men and even spirits recog¬ 
nized him as “the Holy one of God” (John 6:69; 
Mark 1:24); after his resurrection and ascension 
he is spoken of as “the holy and righteous One” 
and as “God’s holy servant” (Acts 3:14; 4:30). 
Concerning himself he openly declared that the 
Father had sanctified and sent him into the world 

'SCf Bartlett, art. “Sanctification,” Hastings’ Dic¬ 
tionary of the Bible , Vol. IV, p. 394. 

16 Alas, that D^n should have supplanted T2Hp! 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


33 


(John 10:36; 17: 18, 19); while Paul verifies the 
declaration of prophecy that he is “the Son of 
God with power according to the spirit of holiness ” 
(Rom. 1: 4). 

The proofs of his unique and holy life are 
everywhere abundant. He emphatically declared 
that it was his meat to do the will of Him that 
sent him (John 4:34); that he came down from 
heaven not to do his own will (6: 38) ; and that he 
glorified his Father while here upon the earth, 
having finished the work which he gave him to do 
(17:4). Thus in Jesus we see the perfectly holy 
life — a life lived in the flesh and yet so con¬ 
secrated to his Father that God’s will was its one 
and only aim. Jesus was holy because his purposes 
were holy; and, his purposes being holy, he dedi¬ 
cated his whole strength, powers, life, to the accom¬ 
plishment, not of his own, but of his Father’s, work. 
For, as the apostle reminds us, “ Christ pleased 
not himself” (Rom. 15:3). Thus the consumma¬ 
tion of holiness is to be found in the incarnation 
of Jesus Christ. 

How, then, shall we define holiness ? The 
concept has obviously grown with the development 
of revelation. It has increased with men’s appre¬ 
ciation of the greatness of God’s claim upon them. 
The thunders of Sinai have been exchanged for the 


34 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


love of Calvary. Shall we, however, call holiness 
love ? To Paul and John love is apparently its 
all-inclusive, ethical equivalent. Yet holiness is 
not love exactly; for love issues only in redemp¬ 
tion, whereas holiness issues in both redemption 
and judgment. Holiness punishes(</. Ezek. 28:22 ; 
36:21, 22). “Holiness is higher than love in 
that it conditions love.” Whatever may be its 
strict definition when applied to God, it is certain¬ 
ly the most comprehensive predicate of the God¬ 
head, including the ideas of incomparableness, 
unapproachableness, exclusive adorableness, separa¬ 
tion from impurity and sin, absolute perfection of 
life in an ethical sense, self-affirming purity, and 
supreme moral excellence. It is the most charac¬ 
teristic and fundamental attribute of God — the 
ground of moral obligation and the goal of man’s 
religious career ; too large and too complex to be 
comprehended by the human intellect, and yet 
sufficiently simple to commend itself to all rational 
and intelligent beings as the supremest ideal of 
religion and the summum bonurn for man. There 
is force in its very vagueness. Among all the 
qualities that are divine, holiness stands first. 
With every advance made in knowledge of the true 
God its significance becomes more profound and 
its demands upon us more imperative. Holiness 
is symmetry. Holiness is perfection. Holiness 
is moral obligation and duty. 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 35 


6. Its practical application. — Before dismissing 
this great and ennobling theme three thoughts of 
supreme practical importance should be added: 

a) In order to be holy, it is demanded that one be 
absolutely devoted to God —“ holy both in body and 
in spirit” (1 Cor. 7: 34). As Beecher has epigram- 
matically expressed it: “Holiness is wholeness.” 
And the apostle enjoins: “ Like as he who called 

you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all man¬ 
ner of living” (1 Pet. 1:15). As Jesus sanctified 
himself, so must we ourselves ; as he separated him¬ 
self from the common and sordid interests of life, 
so must we ; as he devoted himself unreservedly to 
the one purpose of doing the Father’s will, so must 
we. For that man alone is holy who dedicates 
himself entirely to God, who regards himself as 
belonging to God, and who employs all his time 
and opportunities to work out the purposes of 
God. In the Old Testament times, in order to 
teach men that God claimed them, it was neces¬ 
sary to set apart for himself certain men and places, 
specific things and seasons, and in due time Israel 
learned something of the idea of holiness ; but 
when Christ came, he taught that this idea must 
be realized in every man and every place and 
thing and time. But especially “the man whom 
Jehovah doth choose he shall be holy” (Numb. 
16:7). 


36 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


b) The second thought of supreme importance is 
that holy consecration to God implies complete victory 
over sin. For sin always tends to frustrate the pur¬ 
poses of God. There can be no complete devotion 
to God without complete victory over the inward 
tendency to evil within us. I am not now speaking 
of perfect sanctification. For there is a difference 
between holiness and sanctification. Holiness is 
an attitude; sanctification, a state. Holiness de¬ 
notes the purpose of him who has voluntarily 
determined to make God’s ends his ends ; sancti¬ 
fication is the character obtained through the exe¬ 
cution of that purpose. Holiness is a lifelong 
series of upright decisions; sanctification is an 
ever-increasing increment of spiritual capital and 
power. The apostle Paul was holy when he wrote 
to the Philippian brethren: “This one thing I 
do” (3:13); he was in a high degree sanctified when 
he declared to Timothy: “ I have fought a good 
fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the 
faith ” (2 Tim. 4: 7). 

But what we wish most to emphasize is this: 
One cannot be said to be holy so long as he is 
still willing to commit sin. The Bible is a unit on 
that point. In the Levitical law there is no atone¬ 
ment provided for sins committed willfully. Over 
and over again it is rehearsed that it is the soul 
that sins “through ignorance” for whom the sin- 


BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 37 

offering is provided in the ritual ( cf . Lev. 4:2, 22, 
2 7 ; 5: 1 5—18); whereas sins that are committed 
“ with a high hand,” that is, in deliberate defiance 
to God’s will, remain not only unforgiven, but 
“ that soul shall utterly be cut off : his iniquity 
shall be upon him ” (Numb. 15:30, 31). John 
likewise tells us very plainly that “whosoever is 
begotten of God doeth no sin, because his seed 
abideth in him and he cannot sin because he is be¬ 
gotten of God” (1 John 3:9). 

Accordingly, to be holy one must be careful 
not to commit sin willingly. For holiness is con¬ 
ditioned upon forsaking sin and loving righteous¬ 
ness. “ Sanctify yourselves, therefore, and be ye 
holy” (Lev. 11:14; 1 Thess. 4:3). 

c) The third thought is that the holy life is the 
ideal life. If holiness includes all that we have above 
found to be contained in it of separation, and sin¬ 
lessness, and freedom from evil, and cleanness, 
and purity, and self-consistency, and completeness 
of life, and of nearness to God, and Godlikeness, 
then I ask, in all earnestness and solemnity: How 
infinitely superior is a holy life to any other that 
can be lived? Holiness is an ideal that can be 
pursued at all times. It is the source of every 
kind of human excellence. It brings joy and 
cheer to the soul. It also satisfies the intelligence ; 


38 BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF HOLINESS 


for, as John Bascom 17 says, “ Complete knowledge 
includes complete holiness.” It makes God’s glory 
our chief end. It sets before us God’s great world- 
plan to save lost men, making it our plan. It 
kindles enthusiasm. It fits a man to live. It 
makes men not only right with God, but right 
also with one another. In short, true religion is 
holiness. 

17 Philosophy of Religion , p. 95. 






























/it 




JUL 27 1903 






































